On the day that Salman Butt, newly released 21 months early from a 30-month prison sentence, returned to Pakistan, garlanded in some quarters, ready to downplay his role in the spot-fixing sting at Lord's two summers ago to nothing more than failing to report an approach by a huckster and hoping perhaps even to rebuild a cricket life forever tainted by his criminality, another Pakistan cricketer, Danish Kaneria, found the career that had established him as his country's fourth highest Test wicket-taker brought to a summary end in London.

Kaneria was handed a lifetime ban by the England and Wales Cricket Board Disciplinary Committee on two counts that saw his erstwhile Essex team-mate, Mervyn Westfield, jailed for spot-fixing and, had they been as suggestible as Westfield, might have seen others go the same way. Westfield, also recently released from his prison sentence, received an ECB ban of five years, the same length of time, effectively, imposed on Butt, who himself was found guilty of recruiting the bowlers Mohammad Amir and Mohammad Asif in order to deliberately bowl no-balls to order, and independently of his criminal sentence received a cricket ban of 10 years, half of it suspended on condition of good behaviour.

This means that potentially Butt could in a relatively short time return to the game as a player, coach, administrator, umpire, mentor, groundsman or any activity associated with cricket, however unlikely some of these may seem.

For Kaneria, though, not actually convicted of any offence in a court of law but according to evidence produced at the Westfield trial up to his neck in the nefarious activity of recruiting gullible and greedy players into the criminal circle – a charge he will appeal against – it is curtains. Presumably he will be allowed to watch cricket, but that is as far as it would ever go now. Already he has made a television appearance suggesting that his ban "isn't fair". Put the two cases together and at first glance it does seem that he has a point: a criminal (Butt rather than Westfield here because his role as recruiter mirrors that of Kaneria) convicted of offences within the game can play again in a few years while he, Kaneria, will never do so again.

Here is the difference, though. The ban on Butt was imposed by the International Cricket Council while Kaneria's comes courtesy of the ECB. In other words, because Butt's offence was committed around a match played under the jurisdiction of the ICC, it was in their remit to issue any sanctions. ECB as a member of ICC is bound by statute to respect this ban which covers all 105 ICC full members, associates and affiliates. Thus Butt could even play cricket in England in a few years' time. Kaneria's offence, on the other hand, in coercing Westfield, who testified against him at his criminal trial, and attempting to do the same to others, was in county cricket, under ECB auspices, and it is they who have handed out the sentence. In the same way as with Butt's sentence, all other ICC members, including of course his own country of Pakistan, are duty bound to uphold the bans in their own countries.

None of this means that the inequity, in terms of Kaneria, is wrong but rather it is the relative leniency bestowed on Butt that is at odds with the seriousness of his misdemeanour. Despite warnings Kaneria kept the worst of company and at the very least was the cynical ringmaster of a circus intent on maintaining immense corruption within the game.

He represents, as the ECB statement has said, "a grave danger to the game" and as such, from Pakistan to Peru, Finland to the Falkland Islands, he will find no cricketing sanctuary now in which to turn his arm over. Quite right too. ECB has shown real leadership here in using the ultimate deterrent that it possesses while the ICC flunked it. And as for Kaneria, whatever expertise he might have to offer, cricket is well shot of him.